Extracted Text

The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:

Texas v. White

usurpation of power justly having that effect. It will hardly becontended that there is anything in the compact authorizing aparty to dissolve it at pleasure.14Madison argued that the attempt by one party to expound orannul the compact gave the others the option of accepting theannulment or insisting, peaceably or forcibly, upon the fulfillmentof obligations by the recalcitrant member. Immediately, how-ever, he said that such an enforcement would be disastrous and"fatal to the hopes of liberty and humanity; and presents acatastrophe at which all ought to shudder."'"The same idea was echoed in the public utterances and procla-mations of President Jackson during the nullification period. Itwas also popular among those who opposed secession and nullifi-cation on grounds other than those which controlled the action ofJackson. The questions and issues were political in nature, to alarge extent, and, as there would inevitably be a division of senti-ment, it was not likely that consent should ever be secured for adissolution of the Union; so the theory was employed later by themost ultra-radical unionists. The argument of the various partieswhich adopted this theory was very similar to that of Madison.In fact, the administration leaders in the Jackson period, likeSenator Benton, of Missouri, employed' the actual words of Madi-son as authoritative refutation of the extreme State rights posi-tion of those who favored nullification. The attitude of thePresident was made clear in the famous proclamation to SouthCarolina, in which, after some vacillation and hesitation, the com-pact theory is accepted, with the results which Madison had de-scribed. In this connection he said,Because the Union was formed by compact, it is said that theparties to that compact may, when they feel themselves aggrieved,depart from it: but it is prescisely because it is a compact thatthey cannot. A compact is an agreement or binding obligation."Hunt (editor), Madison's Works, IX, 355-356.15Ibid., 357. The theory of contract above presented was frequently re-peated by Madison. Its reaffirmation is found in the assertions: "Werethis a mere league, each of the parties would have an equal right to ex-pound it; and of course, there would be as much right in one to insist onthe bargain, as in another to renounce it" (IX, 347); "The former (aparticular State) as only one of the parties, owes fidelity to it, till re-leased by consent, or absolved by an intolerable abuse of the powercreated" (IX, 490).